This study was designed to investigate the trust relationship between parents and teachers in first grade. Additional research questions were whether trust was related to ethnicity and reading performance. The five facets of trust; benevolence, reliability, competence, honesty and openness, were measured on a 4-point Likert scale. Reading performance was measured by the three-minute test. Parents were found to have more trust in the reliability, competence and honesty of teachers than teachers in parents. Native-Dutch and immigrant parents have the same (...) trust level towards their children?s teacher. However, teachers reported lower trust levels on all five facets of trust for immigrant parents. Our findings indicated that ethnicity has no influence on parents trust in teachers, but ethnicity may explain teachers? trust in parents. Some support was found for the assumption that teachers? trust plays a role in reading performance. Children were found to have higher reading performance when teachers reported higher trust in the benevolence and openness of parents. (shrink)

Confusion concerning the issue of universality of colour categorization would greatly diminish if context regains its fundamental status in psychological research and we give up on the reductionist notion that biological universality implies behavioral universality.

Research based on traditional linear techniques has yet not been able to clearly identify the role of cognitive skills in reading problems, presumably because the process of reading and the factors that are associated with reading reside within a system of multiple interacting and moderating factors that cannot be captured within traditional statistical models. If cognitive skills are indeed indicative of reading problems, the relatively new nonlinear techniques of machine learning should make better predictions. The aim of the present study (...) was to investigate whether cognitive factors play any role in reading skill, questioning the extent to what cognitive skills are indicative of present reading level, and the extent to what cognitive skills are indicative of future reading progress. In three studies with varying groups of participants, the results of four supervised machine learning techniques were compared to the traditional General Linear Models technique. Results of all models appeared to be comparable, producing poor to acceptable results, which are however inadequate for making a thorough prediction of reading development. Assumably, cognitive skills are not predictive of reading problems, although they do correlate with one another. This insight has consequences for scientific theories of reading development, as well as for the prevention and remediation of reading difficulties. (shrink)